Network Intervention Analyses of cognitive therapy and behavior therapy for insomnia: Symptom specific effects and process measures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cognitive therapy (CT) and behavior therapy (BT) are both effective for insomnia. In this study we applied Network Intervention Analysis to investigate specific effects of CT and BT on outcomes and process measures. The analysis was based on a randomized controlled trial comparing CT (n = 65), BT (n = 63) and cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (n = 60; not included in this study). In the first networks, the separate items of the Insomnia Severity Index and sleep efficiency were included. In the second networks, the pre-specified process measures for BT and CT, sleep efficiency, and the sum-score of the Insomnia Severity Index were included. At the different time points, we found CT-effects on worry, impaired quality of life, dysfunctional beliefs, and monitoring sleep-related threats, and BT-effects on sleep efficiency, difficulty maintaining sleep, early morning awakening, time in bed, sleep incompatible behaviors and bed- and rise time variability. These observed effects of CT and BT were consistent with their respective theoretical underpinnings. This study provided new information on the mechanisms of change in CT and BT. In the future, this may guide us to the most effective treatment modules or even subsets of interventions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".